http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hain-templin-ipv6-localcomm-04.txt
If you think there is something false about them, you'll have to tell us all by way of commenting on the draft.
Thanks - Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keith Moore wrote:
Fred,
you're working from false premises, so your conclusions are invalid.
Keith
Keith,
You are just plain wrong; read the Mirriam-Webster definitions
for terms like "organization", "enterprise", etc. then read:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hain-templin-ipv6- localcomm-04.txt
and you will see that "organizational scope" is the logical choice.
Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Keith Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > I've chewed on this for quite a while, and I think some derivative > of "private" would be good but a suggestion we heard earlier is > even better. I recall seeing some time back the suggestion of > "Organizational Addresses", and I think this fits best of all.
that's completely ridiculous. these addresses are not specific to an organization at all.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
